Amended ‘ag-gag’ bill passes out of Senate committee

The controversial “ag-gag” bill passed out of the Senate Committee on Corrections and Criminal Law Monday, after its sponsor made a major revision intended to address concerns of opponents of the bill.

The original bill would have made it a crime for anyone to enter a farmer’s property and do anything that resulted in monetary loss.

Senate Bill 101 was aimed largely at banning undercover videotaping of farm activities, but many critics considered it to be overly broad.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Travis Holdman, R-Markle, offered new language would make it a crime “only if a trespasser causes property damage to the farm.”

A person who trespasses on an agricultural property or operation and causes property damages from $750 to $50,000 would be charged with a Level 6 felony. This is the same penalty for the offense on school properties, churches and other institutions.

Holdman said he made the change after talking with a number of groups that were opposed to the bill, as originally written. A similar bill was defeated at the end of last year’s session.

The Senate Committee on Corrections and Criminal Law approved the amended bill by a vote of 8-2, with Sen. Lonnie Randolph, D-East Chicago, and Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis, voting “no.” The measure now moves to the full Senate for consideration.

Randolph said he voted against it because he still believes the intent of the bill is to suppress First Amendment and consumer protest rights, despite the change in the language.

He added that the $750 minimum is very low and farm owners could inflate damage claims in order to have a person prosecuted who is trying to find out about improper operations or animal cruelty.

Sen. Mark Stoops, D-Bloomington, who was against the bill previously, said he changed his vote because the bill focuses solely on property damage, rather than estimated value of a business’ reputation or loss of sales.

The bill, he said, puts an agricultural operation on a level playing field with other similar properties, such as schools.

“It takes away all the First Amendment violations in the previous bill,” he said.

Steve Key, executive director for the Hoosier State Press Association, agrees the amendment removes all language that posed First Amendment concerns, so the association no longer opposes the bill.

“It now focuses on the criminal mischief and criminal trespass statutes, but doesn’t impact news-gathering efforts of the media,” he said.

Key said the earlier version created a means by which publication of photos or videos of agricultural operations could have created, in effect, a criminal defamation prosecution with truth not statutorily a defense for what was pictured.

He added he will continue to watch the bill and would be disappointed if attempts are made to reinsert First Amendment restrictions.

Erin Huang, state director of The Humane Society of the United States, said before taking a position on the amended bill her organization is reviewing more closely the impact of changes.

She said the Humane Society wants to make sure it’s not affecting the ability for “whistle-blowers” to draw attention to bad agricultural operations.